The Examiner is reporting that an informant at the Department of Homeland Security under the direction of Obama appointee Janet Napolitano, considers all citizens who participate in today’s ‘National Opt Out Day’ at airports across the country to be ‘domestic extremists.’

But that’s not all.

DHS also considers any citizen who merely criticizes TSA scanning procedures or who writes articles critical of the procedures in the ‘alternative media’ to be a ‘domestic extremist.’

According to the mole inside Homeland Security, Obama and company do not take kindly to being criticized or opposed in this current outrageous invasion of privacy by the federal government. DHS personnel composed a document approved by Napolitano which implies that critics or those who refuse to go through the ‘naked scanners’ are to be considered potential criminals.

The document specifically addresses ‘the alternative media,’ the assumption being that bloggers, citizen journalists, and writers who report for news organizations that are outside the ‘mainstream media’ such as CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the AP, Time, and Newsweek, are to be considered ‘extremist’ if they merely write anything critical of TSA procedures, which include groping, prodding, and fondling,

Canada Free Press broke the story when they wrote: that they were contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday at the hand of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Indeed, both the terminology and content contained in the document are troubling. The dissemination of the document itself is restricted by virtue of its classification, which prohibits any manner of public release. While the document cannot be posted or published, the more salient points are revealed here.

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”

The introductory paragraph of the multi-page document states that it is issued “in response to the growing public backlash against enhanced TSA security screening procedures and the agents conducting the screening process.” Implicit within the same section is that the recently enhanced security screening procedures implemented at U.S. airports, and the measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President. In other words, Obama not only endorses the enhanced security screening, but the measures outlined in this directive to be taken in response to public objections.

The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who “interferes” with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, “including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day” as a “domestic extremist.” The label is then broadened to include “any person, group or alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures.

For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.

It would appear that the Department of Homeland Security is not only prepared to enforce the enhanced security procedures at airports, but is involved in gathering intelligence about those who don’t. They’re making a list and most certainly will be checking it twice. Meanwhile, legitimate threats to our air travel security (and they DO exist) seem to be taking a back seat to the larger threat of the multitude of non-criminal American citizens who object to having their Constitutional rights violated.

Homeland Security under Obama has a history of labeling innocent citizens as ‘domestic terrorists’ or ‘domestic extremists’ if they participate in Tea Party protests, promote gun rights, insist that the government follow the Constitution, oppose the numerous instances of power-grabs by the Executive Branch, or even merely protest the move to seize the healthcare industry through the colossal Marxist abomination known as ‘ObamaCare.’

WorldNet Daily reported that In April of 2009, a newly unclassified Department of Homeland Security report warned against the possibility of violence by unnamed “right-wing extremists” concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty and singles out returning war veterans as particular threats.

However, the document, goes on to suggest worsening economic woes, potential new legislative restrictions on firearms and “the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”

The report from DHS’ Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines right-wing extremism in the U.S. as “divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

In December of 2009 Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the aviation security system failed when a young Nigerian man with a powerful explosive hidden on his body was allowed to board a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day. Napolitano says investigators are examining Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (OO’-mahr fah-ROOK’ ahb-DOOL’-moo-TAH’-lahb) was allowed the flight despite being on a terrorist watch list.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, ” The System Worked” before ” The system Failed”

MR. GREGORY: Right. But, Secretary Napolitano, the question is whether the system really did do everything that it should have done. He was on a terror watch list. His father had raised concerns about him being radicalized to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria. He was not on a do not fly list, which is a, a separate kind of cataloguing of threats. Do you think the fact that he was on a watch list should have triggered a secondary screening in the airport in Amsterdam?

SEC’Y NAPOLITANO: Well, this is the way it works. He was on a TIDE list. There are over a half a million people on that TIDE list, and that information was shared throughout the federal family. There’s no question about information sharing here. There had never been any additional information supplied that would move him to what’s called a Selectee list, where you are–where you do that kind of secondary screening, or indeed to the No Fly list, which requires specific, credible, derogatory information. Now, I think one of the things we will do–because that’s a system that has been in place for a number of years. One of the things we will do is go back and look and say, well, maybe in this day and age, with the kind of environment we have, we should change some of those protocols. But right now he, he was on a, a generic list, if I could use that phrase, but we did not have the kind of information that under the current rules would elevate him.

So- they now are groping law abiding citizens instead of doing their job….?